Why do some lcd panels have a screen ratio of 15:9...

Rob20

Prominent Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2004
Messages
3,502
Reaction score
884
Points
680
....instead of 16:9, and how does this affect the picture. Does 16:9 material have borders, is it squashed to fit in? are there borders? :confused:
 
I think it's due to the manufacturers building the displays initially for computer use. 1280x768 is a computer w/s res. Those with primariy interests in the HC market seem to have true 16:9 displays but those with a history in the PC marketplace seem to still think PC res is OK.

I could be wrong but that's my take on it, FWIW.
 
Rob20 said:
....instead of 16:9, and how does this affect the picture. Does 16:9 material have borders, is it squashed to fit in? are there borders? :confused:

I think it varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. JVC's screens (when in the "Full" mode for anamorphic video) insert small black bars above and below. I think Sharp's 15:9 screens crop off the ends of the picture (although I might be wrong about this - anyone?)
 
I'm just in the process of investigating buying a 32" LCD TV, and I've been amazed at the number of TVs that are being advertised as 16:9 which are in fact only 15:9 :confused:. A large proportion of recent 30"/32" models are only 1280 x 768 which equates to 15:9 ratio. Fortunately there are beginning to creep in several new 32" models with true 1366 x 768 16:9 screens :).

A local retailer was most surprised when I pointed out that one particular model was only 15:9, until he checked his specs and had to agree with me!
 
This crop sup again and again. Very few are true 16:9. Nigel tells us his Samsung 22 is 1280x720, and some are 848x480, but few if any others are real 16:9
 
I don't think it matters provided the screen has the right mode to ensure no stretching and no loss of image.

Remember that a 15:9 screen will be better when viewing 4:3 material and 14:9 material, of which there is plenty on terrestrial TV
 
Who watches (analogue) terrestrial tv these days? most stuff on digital TV is 16:9
 
cybersoga said:
Who watches (analogue) terrestrial tv these days? most stuff on digital TV is 16:9

Forgive the ignorance, but I don't have digital. Is BBC1 on freeview different to BBC1 terrestrial analogue then ?
 
I recently upgraded from analogue ntl to digital and was surprised to find that a large number of programmes that had been 14:9 were now in 16:9. Though you still have the option to watch in 4:3 also.
 
Gregorski said:
Forgive the ignorance, but I don't have digital. Is BBC1 on freeview different to BBC1 terrestrial analogue then ?

Yes. Much of BBC1 output is 16x9 via digital. Ditto all the other 4 channels. Some occasional sports (eg from overseas), and OLD TV shows, are 4x3; most new programming, and movies, are broadcast 16x9.
 
My Samsung LW26A33W is 15:9 (1280x768).
When connected to a freeview box it fills the height (cropping the sides). Sometimes when switching channels, it briefly shows properly (i.e. 1280x720 letterboxed) but then is expanded. I can't find any way of disabling this (still waiting for response from Samsung).
PC with DVB card connected via VGA displays fine.
 
That is the usual type of experience. The Sharp 37" cuts off the sides. It's a nuisance, but they rarely seem to get it right. The Relisys 1720 letterboxes correctly, if they can do it at that price, why can't the others.
 
Just thought I'd point out that the pixels may not be square...
yes, 1280:768 is actually 15:9, but the actual dimensions of a screen may still be 16:9. Take the ALIS panels - 1024x1024 - you're not telling me they're square are you?

As to thin black bars top and bottom... could this be that you are watching a 1.85:1 movie? 16:9 = 1.78:1, hence you'll always get thin black bars on a 16:9 TV - although they will be almost impossible to see on most CRTs due to overscan.
 
Wish it were so, like some plasmas, as you point out, though in fact rectangular pixels are an infernal nuisance for PC use. But quite a number of LCD screens are truly 15:9 or thereabouts. My laptop being one of them, at 1650x1050. You can clearly see in this case it's not the same shape as a widescreen TV.
 
The LW26A33W is 15:9. I did measure it.
Approx 56.5cm x 34cm (1.66 ratio).
 
Yuk. I hadn't realised that - I've always assumed that PC screens would probably have square pixels, mind you most PC LCDs these days are 1280x1024 - which now I think about it isn't even 4:3 - bizarre. I can't quite believe that they make TVs like that.

Now I think about it, I do seem to recall wondering about an LCD panel in John Lewis a while ago - I just put it down to crap set-up at the time, but it could well be this problem.
 
I suppose the ultimate question regarding a 15:9 ratio is whether it actually matters!?
 
Rob20 said:
I suppose the ultimate question regarding a 15:9 ratio is whether it actually matters!?

If the screen crops the sides of the picture off, I'd say yes. If it just adds small black bars above & below a 16:9 picture I'd say no
 
Almost all LCD's use square pixels (unlike plasmas). All you have to do is divide the number of pixels horizontally by the number vertically, thus

1280:720 = 1.7777777777777777777777777777778:1 = 16:9
1280:768 = 1.6666666666666666666666666666667:1 = 15:9
852:480 = 1.775:1
 
cerebros said:
If the screen crops the sides of the picture off, I'd say yes. If it just adds small black bars above & below a 16:9 picture I'd say no

Exactly. Unfortunately some crop, Sharp being one. This is quite surprising since they are supposed to be the market leader.
 
I suppose that if such a screen was set up so as to overscan laterally, by the amount normal for all TVs, but to not overscan AT ALL vertically, then you'd get a more or less undistorted image, not missing anything that you wouldn't miss anyway, and gaining a bit top and bottom.
 
You've got a point there Nigel. Here we are carping on about flat panels, forgetting that almost all CRT's are far from faultless, particularly in the overscan dept.
 
Obviously this takes into account most av enthusiast's view that everything should be viewed in the correct aspect ratio. A large number of people who buy this size of LCD TV will want their screen filled and therefore cropping the sides of a 16:9 image to fit a 15:9 screen is one way to stop the 'why have I got black bars at the top and bottom of the screen' calls to customer services.

I would imagine it is incredibly simple to include it as an option in a menu though, after all many people like to zoom images on CRT to get rid of black bars...........
 
D J Fryer said:
I would imagine it is incredibly simple to include it as an option in a menu though, after all many people like to zoom images on CRT to get rid of black bars...........

Quite. Since these are probably still being aimed at the enthusiast, you would expect them to be catered for. This is still a premium product at a premium price after all.
 
nigel said:
I suppose that if such a screen was set up so as to overscan laterally, by the amount normal for all TVs, but to not overscan AT ALL vertically, then you'd get a more or less undistorted image, not missing anything that you wouldn't miss anyway, and gaining a bit top and bottom.

But now you've got your nice new LCD screen, which won't suffer from any of the distortions you get on a CRT set when you start reducing the overscan by large amounts (when I briefly had a JVC 32P37 I think I could reduce overscan down to the 5% marks on the DVE anamorphic geometry patter before uncorrectable distortion set in), you surely want to see the whole of the picture available?
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom